What I'm reading today

[PygmyHero]

I spend most of my time on 2+2 reading threads, so I thought it may be interesting to post about whatever I'm studying.

I will post the name of the forum that the thread is from, the OP's name, the post title, the post number, and the date. That way if a post gets archived, it will still be easy to locate.

If this is well received, I will try to update it daily, as I am usually on 2+2 every day. If not, no big deal.

Forum: Small Stakes Limit Texas Hold 'Em
Poster: bobbyi
Thread: Please dissect this drawing hand
Number: 3688548
Date: 10.16.05

To be fair, this link was just posted a few days ago, but I can't remember who gets the credit - I think it was GregJ (who contributed to the above thread).

My thoughts, which I'll keep very brief today as I don't know if people will appreciate this or not:

In this hand, you have a draw to the second nut flush on the button with 3 other players in. The debate is over whether the flop and river should be called or raised (you make the flush on the river).

This is a fairly complex thread. I think everyone should be able to learn something from this thread.

I feel that the flop action did not receive sufficient discussion. That is unfortunate since that aspect of the hand is the most interesting and challenging, in my opinion. A few people stated their opinions, but I do not feel anyone gave a compelling argument as to why they would choose a certain action.

Personally, I would just call on the flop, and I don't think anyone made an argument that will lead me to alter my play in this type of situation. However, the consensus seems to be that it is close.

The river action received a lot of discussion, but the second half of the thread degenerates into a pissing match (without much content) between Borodog and Evan. Honestly, you should read the first half of the thread and completely ignore the second half. You won't miss anything.

My thought here is that you should raise the river, and I really feel Evan gave some good analysis and insightful thoughts as to why this was the proper action. However, there are arguments for calling, and I feel a number of people made very good posts in this thread.

Would people be interested in me continuing to post like this? I am open to any criticisms or suggestions for improvement.

[Greg J]

I remember this thread. I originally advocated a smooth call on the flop, but Evan really made a great case for raising and ended up convincing me.

As for the flop, I don't think it recieved as much debate b/c it's not as close a decision as you think. That was a routine call, but I think it's indicative that here in ML people often tend to advocate betting and raising when calling is actually better.

[milesdyson]

[ QUOTE ]
That was a routine call, but I think it's indicative that here in ML people often tend to advocate betting and raising when calling is actually better.

[/ QUOTE ]
it's table/opponent dependent. at that table it was a call, at many many lower limit tables, that's a raise.

[PygmyHero]

Forum: Texas Hold 'Em Archives
Poster: bunky9590
Thread: Newest Pet Peeve. (Reads)
Number: 1775375
Date: 2.21.05

This thread is basically what you'd expect - an admonition and a warning that we're using stats too much at the expense of reads. While this isn't a new thought, I think it is valuable to have reinforcement every so often. Relying too much on stats is something I think everyone is guilty of periodically.

Here's a similar thread:

Forum: Microlimit
Poster: Entity
Thread: When a read is not a read
Number: 2302308
Date: 5.3.05

In fact, tiltaholic links to bunky's thread near the end of Entity's thread.

There are two things I really like about Entity's thread:
1) Since it's by ENTITY, you're more likely to read it and listen to his advice.
2) He does something bunky does not, which is make an explicit challenge to turn off your HUD and work on your reads and notes. I really think this is a valuable exercise.

As long as I'm sighting some work on reads, here's another thread some may find useful:

Forum: Microlimit
Poster: Droolie
Thread: Pay Attention of Just Pay (how to develop your reads)
Number: 3158790
Date: 8.16.05

This is a really good post by droolie, and there is the additional benefit of having an excellend picture of him in the thread.

And now, some nonsense...I read the famous pattern mapping thread today for amusement. Its everything you've heard it is, only worse by a factor of x=y*sqrt(37.2fn(z^3)log8). I found jek's comments particularly funny. Really, don't read the whole thing. It really deteriorates, but I'm not sure exactly where. Definitely don't read any of the essays.

Forum: Internet Gambling Archives
Poster: ctv1116
Thread: Can Party Poker 4th and 5th street cards be predicted?
Number: 498421
Date: 1.27.04

I also found it hilarious (as one poster in the thread pointed out) how many people posted questions like, 'OMFG, is this for real?!?!?!' despite the fact that the thread had been going on for a while and numberous posters were already saying what a great joke it was.

[Evan]

If anyone is interested, I used this hand as an example in an article about analyzing hands. You can read the article here.

[PygmyHero]

Hmmm...I just noticed my links aren't working. Actually, it looks like they don't exist. I must have forgotten to add them or something. Please find them below:

Newest Pet Peeve. (Reads)

when a read is not a read

Pay Attention or Just Pay (how to develop your reads)

Can Party Poker 4th and 5th street cards be predicted?

Edit: I don't know why they're not showing up as links. The code seems correct. You can cut and paste the address. I'll try to post them as links again later. Sorry!

Edited by the moderator to fix your links. For some stupid reason, links break if the post is too long. "Too long" isn't all that long. The one link you posted that was super-duper long caused the whole thing to break. If, instead, you cut off the post after the first instance of "Number=#######" and delete the rest, things will look better. To see for yourself, quote this and see where I cut it off.

[MrWookie47]

Oh man, not that "can cards be predicted?" thread again. [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]

[PygmyHero]

[ QUOTE ]
Edited by the moderator to fix your links. For some stupid reason, links break if the post is too long. "Too long" isn't all that long. The one link you posted that was super-duper long caused the whole thing to break. If, instead, you cut off the post after the first instance of "Number=#######" and delete the rest, things will look better. To see for yourself, quote this and see where I cut it off.

[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks for fixing the links Wookie. I did not know that and will make sure I am attentive to it in the future. And yes, that is a long thread.

[benkath1]

[ QUOTE ]
If anyone is interested, I used this hand as an example in an article about analyzing hands. You can read the article here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Excellent hand analysis. I think this:

[ QUOTE ]
When UTG+2 check raises we should just call again, even though we have relative position that could make a raise +EV, because we will gain more by preserving our implied odds

[/ QUOTE ]

is something most micro players fail to consider. It might not be relevant in most of the games we are playing, but I just keep reading it to get it to soak in. So many times, I have raised here, only to have it check/folded, or check/called by one, on the river when my hand hit. By smooth calling, you are inducing a river bluff/value bet, who will pay you off anyway.

[PygmyHero]

Well I lost my internet connection yesterday due to inclement weather, so I missed a day...bet you all thought it was going away, huh?

Today's topic is flush draws.

Forum: Microlimit Archives
Poster: Ajax410
Thread: A definitive post on playing flush draws
Number: 1174623
Date: 10.25.04

There's some decent discussion of effective odds in this thread, a topic that I've only seen online a few times (and in TOP).

Although this is Ajax's post (and meaning no disrespect to him), I feel the best comments come from jrz1972, jason1990, and srt19170.

jason1990's point
[ QUOTE ]
This is interesting. If you have J, Q and get a flush draw on the flop, what I would worry about most is two hearts coming, so that the lone K or A will beat you. It's as though you have a "reverse backdoor flush draw" on top of your flush draw. This seems to suggest you should deduct 1.5 outs (if you know the K or A is out there). This gives you only 7.5 outs, which is 2.4:1 of coming in by the river. Hence, you need at least three callers to bet/raise for value.


[/ QUOTE ]
is one that I feel is frequently overlooked. People rarely discount their outs (correctly, or at all) for the chances of being beaten by a full house, quads, a bigger flush, or a straight flush.

I feel like it is a fairly common practice to bet out with your flush draw nowadays, and furthermore, many people will recognize it for what it is. This is, to a large extent, a conventional play now, even at fairly low limits. However, it is much more rare for people to raise or check raise with their draws, and almost unfathomable that anyone would ram and jam (more on that next time).

The idea of disguising your hand by betting OOP is well known, so I won't drone on about it. From later position, the free card play is another commonly known concept, but I'd like to expand that idea a little bit.

I have never seen anyone post about the free card out of position play. In my mind the free card OOP play is check raising the flop, and then checking the turn, hoping it gets checked all the way through. This DOES work sometimes (especially if you sometimes check raise the flop with other hands in EP).

I think it works because after you check raise the flop, whoever’s in the hand will be very reluctant to bet the turn, even if you check to them. Here's the player's thought process: 'I'm sure as hell not letting him check raise me two streets in a row!' After all, how silly would that look?

A lot of low limit players are not confident enough about their reads, or they may not accurately assess the strength of their hand. It's even possible that they may suspect that you want them to check, but again, this is low limit – they don’t have the courage to bet. Thus you gain the free card.

Basically, I think that this sort of play adds quite a bit to your meta-game and needs to be employed from time to time. There could be future situations where you cr the flop with say, TPTK or better, and check the turn (many players will fold to a turn bet UI), but get paid off on the river, almost due to their curiosity (regardless of their holdings). They think they're 'paying for information.'